Economics 1021A/B Study Guide - Quiz Guide: Redistribution Of Income And Wealth

9 views1 pages

spectral

20 Jun 2020

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Study Guides, a Grade+ subscription is required.

mariameelguendou and 38538 others unlocked

ECON 1021A/B Full Course Notes

Verified Note

94 documents

Document Summary

The study of economics is about how the economic system works, rather than how the system can be worked for personal advantage. Concurrently, it is also to be hoped that understanding how the economy works will stimulate more concern with strategies to achieve better social outcomes. The economic context we live in is one of risk and uncertainty. The capacity of governments to manage other processes of income redistribution is impaired by their reluctance to raise taxation to generate the necessary revenue. As students, going to university is an investment in our future. As consumers, choosing one good over another in a scene of vast choice forgoing saving for immediate gratification or vice versa. There is a link between micro personal choices and macro societal choices. As individuals, we all participate in the political economic drama. The personal is political economic (our personal actions affect the political economy and thus, the personal is political economic).

Related Questions

1. Which of the following cannot be determined using a production possibility table?

What combination of outputs can be produced.
How much less of one output can be produced if more of another output is produced.
What combination of outputs is best.
How much output can be produced from a given level of inputs.

2. Internal government debt is:

debt owed by citizens to their government.
debt owed by one government to another government.
government debt owed to citizens.
government debt owed to foreigners.

3. In general, budget deficits should:

never be run since they slow economic growth over the long run.
never be run since they crowd out investment in the short run.
be run on a temporary basis whenever the economy is below potential output.
be run on a permanent basis since they can always be financed over and over again.

4. If taxes and government outlays were constant and did not vary with income, then:

passive deficits would increase.
passive deficits would not exist.
structural deficits would increase.
structural deficits would not exist.

5. If the debt of the federal government increases by $10 billion in one year, then the budget:

deficit in that year must be $10 billion.
surplus in that year must be $10 billion.
deficit in that year decreased by $10 billion.
surplus in that year increased by $10 billion.

6. Which of the following would make the impending Social Security problem worse?

Raising income taxes when the baby boomers begin to retire.
Reducing the age at which one is eligible to receive payments.
Reducing Social Security retirement benefits.
Introducing means testing.

7. The price mechanism is: (Points : 5)

not affected by social and political forces.
affected by social but not political forces.
affected by political but not social forces.
affected by both political and social forces.

8. Social forces:

affect the price mechanism through cultural norms.
affect the price mechanism, but not the legal system.
affect the price mechanism through scarcity.
do not affect the price mechanism.

9. Opportunity cost is the same as marginal cost.

True
False

10. Which of the following is a characteristic of a market economy?

Private property.
Government ownership of the means of production.
Distribution according to need.
Tradition determines the what, how, and for whom decisions.

11. Mexico has a comparative advantage in producing corn:

if its opportunity cost of producing corn is higher than the opportunity cost in other countries.
if its opportunity cost of producing corn is the same as the opportunity cost in other countries.
if its opportunity cost of producing corn is lower than the opportunity cost in other countries.
regardless of the opportunity cost in other countries.

12. The opportunity cost for a student of attending college for a year is best measured by the:

benefit received by the student.
tuition paid for the year.
value of the next-best activity forgone by attending college.
total money outlays associated with attending college.

13. A passive deficit is the portion of the deficit that exists when:

the economy is at potential income.
the economy is beneath potential income.
inflation is not fully anticipated.
inflation is fully anticipated.

14. An important international lending institution is the:

IMF.
The Group of Eight.
EU.
WTO.

15. Private property rights:

are essential elements of a market economies.
do not need to be enforced in market economies.
must be established before a socialist economy can function properly.
ensure an equitable distribution of income in market economies.

16. If a country has a comparative advantage in the production of a good, then its resources are better suited to the production of that good than the resources of other countries.

True
False

17. As the interest rate rises, debt service:

decreases.
does not change, but debt increases.
increases.
does not change and neither does the debt.

18. Your opportunity cost of taking this course is:

the tuition you paid for the course.
the benefit of the activity you would have chosen if you had not taken the course.
the benefit you get from taking this course.
the cost of the activity you would have chosen if you had not taken the course.

19. One advantage of a corporation over a sole proprietorship is:

greater accountability.
avoidance of double taxation.
ease of formation.
greater ability to obtain funds.

20. Maintaining objectivity is easiest in:

positive economics.
the art of economics.
normative economics.
it is just as easy in all of the above

byzantiumimpala567

Learn more about Social Security and Medicare reform (to improve financial strength of the programs) or solvency through Internet exploration. Find an article or resource related to one of these topics. Attach the article and write a brief summary (300-400 words) of what you found. Summarize the Article.

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

U.S. Social Security reform: the clock is ticking

Clocks are seen during the performance "tck tck tck" by Global Campaign for Climate Action at the Barcelona Climate Change Talks, November 4, 2009. REUTERS/Albert Gea

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Can you count on your Social Security benefits when retirement rolls around?

Most Americans worry about this - partly due to the nonsense they hear from political opponents of Social Security and ill-informed media. You will hear that the program is bankrupt, its reserves are nothing but a bunch of IOUs, or that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.

All of those claims are false, but there is one good reason for concern. Social Security faces a long-term financial imbalance that would force sharp benefit cuts in 2034 unless the government makes changes. The problem stems from falling fertility rates and labor force growth - which reduces collection of payroll taxes that fund the system - and also from the retirement of baby boomers, which increases benefit costs.

Absent reform, Social Security could continue to pay roughly 75 percent of promised benefits. The cuts would mean that the typical 65-year-old worker could expect Social Security to replace 27 percent of pre-retirement income, down from 36 percent today, according to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

No surprise, then, that only 37 percent of workers are âvery or somewhat confidentâ that Social Security will be able to maintain current benefit levels in the future, according to survey research by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) - although confidence is much higher among older workers and retirees.

From a math standpoint, potential solutions to the problem are straightforward. The cuts can be avoided through increased revenue, benefit reductions or some combination of the two. But the politics are another matter.

Republicans are far from holding a unified position on the issue. For example, U.S. Representative Sam Johnson, a Texas Republican who chairs the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security, has proposed legislation containing two significant benefit cuts: gradually raising full retirement ages to 69 by 2030, and using a less generous annual cost-of-living adjustment formula known as the chained CPI.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has so far held to his campaign promise of opposing cuts. He has suggested that economic growth will solve the problem by stimulating wage growth and payroll tax collections - a position most economists dismiss as unrealistic.

REPUBLICAN ENTHUSIASM LACKING

The last major Republican reform proposal dates back to the George W. Bush administration, which proposed shifting the program to personal savings accounts - an idea that aroused Republican passion but that went down in flames.

âThat was an idea that got people excited, but there hasnât been much enthusiasm for Social Security reform among Republicans since then,â said Andrew Biggs, resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Biggs worked on Social Security reform as an associate director of the White House National Economic Council.

Meanwhile, Democrats are in no mood to work with the Trump administration on anything that forces a compromise on their core values - and they have shifted significantly to the left on Social Security reform. Representative John Larson has introduced legislation that would not only restore trust fund balance but expand benefits. That is by far the best approach, since roughly half of all households have saved less than $25,000, according to EBRI. Larsonâs bill is cosponsored by more than 80 percent of the Democratic House caucus - more than any previous expansion bill.

The bill would increase benefits by 2 percent across the board, shift to a more generous annual cost-of-living adjustment that reflects spending by seniors and set a new minimum benefit at 25 percent above the poverty line. It also would cut taxes for millions of retirees by boosting significantly the threshold for taxation of benefits.

The plan raises revenue by gradually increasing the payroll tax rates that fund the program. The rate hikes would begin in 2019, and by 2042, workers and employers would pay 7.4 percent each, instead of the current 6.2 percent.

Larson, a Connecticut Democrat, also proposes changes to the payroll tax cap for very wealthy beneficiaries. Currently, payroll tax is collected only on wages up to $127,200; the plan would start collecting taxes again on wages above $400,000. That exempts more income than many earlier expansion plans, which either removed the cap entirely or resumed taxation at $250,000.

The payroll tax cap feature played an important role in boosting support for expansion legislation, according to Max Richtman, CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, a progressive advocacy group that supports the bill. âIt brought many of the more conservative Democratic legislators on board,â he said.

Of course, the Larson bill is going nowhere in the Republican-controlled Congress, so Social Security reform will not happen before the 2018 midterm elections at the earliest - and perhaps much later than that. But that does not mean beneficiaries should worry about draconian cuts in 2034.

Even if reform is not achieved by 2034, Biggs thinks the problem likely would be solved at the 11th hour through tax increases - simply because benefit cuts must be enacted and phased in over long periods to give beneficiaries time to adjust.

âIf they were going to do this by cutting benefits, it should have been enacted 20 years ago,â he said. âIf you want to do it by raising taxes you want to wait as long as possible, so that you get to the point where the only solution is to put more money into the program.â

But the uncertainty on Social Security policy will continue to undermine public confidence in the program - and that is worrying. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking.

Let's change it up a little. You may have to dig a little for this one. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are two banking giants that have been in news because of their role in the 2008 financial crisis. Due to this many in the government believe that the two companies should be put out of business. On the other hand, there are many who believe the companies should remain as they are. See The Case For Keeping Fannie and Freddie Alive. The argument both ways is in a sales pitch for the two contrary opinions. how would you convince someone either way on the issue of Fannie and Freddie? A reference is required to support your post

On just one major piece of economic policy, President Obama and House Republicans share the same basic opinion: kill off government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

This rare bit of consensus might also prove to be a devastating mistake.

Fannie and Freddie which guarantee mortgages were placed under federal conservatorship in 2008 as the housing bust reached its apex. The firms are roughly within $42 billion of repaying the $187.5 billion they received from taxpayers, but Obama and much of Congress plan to wind them down in the belief that another federal bailout will never again be necessary.

We can't leave taxpayers on the hook for irresponsibility or bad decisions by some of these lenders or Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, Obama said in a speech this month. We've got to encourage the pursuit of profit, but the era of expecting a bailout after you pursue your profit and you don't manage your risk well, that puts the whole country at risk. And we're ending those days. We're not going to do that anymore.

But the political debate has been lopsided thus far focused on putting Fannie and Freddie into the grave, while largely ignoring what their demise could mean for homebuyers and the economy a sharp jump in interest rates, and a drop in the availability of mortgages.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has objected to plans to end both companies.

These are the government organizations that have made homeownership so easy, Reid recently told Nevada Public Radio. I don't agree with the president. He says he wants to get rid of them. I'm going to look closely at his recommendations because on their face, I don't like them.

Mostly, economists and investors are framing the issue in the same way as Reid.

It boils down to a tradeoff between shifting risk away from the government and taxpayers, versus keeping mortgages inexpensive and widely available, said Jed Kolko, the chief economist at the real estate firm Trulia. When push comes to shove, it's hard to do both.

Their executives received outlandish bonuses during the boom, only to foist the eventual losses caused by years of mismanagement onto the public. It rightfully enables sucker punches from Capitol Hill that voters approve of, even though the rescue kept the entire housing sector alive. Of the $1.75 trillion worth of mortgages originated last year, about 90 percent were made through the federal government.

This point matters because Fannie and Freddie ensure that the housing market does not seize up during a recession, said Ken Fears, an economist for the National Association of Realtors. Even if more private capital is needed in the mortgage industry, having the government participation creates liquidity that keeps the entire sector operating during tough economic times, Fears said.

Lawmakers tend to assume that the markets can transition over five or 10 years to a mortgage industry with a modest government backstop, or no taxpayer support at all. Before retiring at the end of May as a managing director for bond investor PIMCO, Scott Simon said that this amounted to a fantasy.

The private market can make mortgages, but they would trade at much higher yields and the down payments would be much higher because the private market cannot make competitive, fixed-rate mortgages with 20% or less of a down payment on the loans, Simon told National Mortgage News. Most of the people who think we should shut [the GSEs] down have a pure philosophical belief and they don't care what the outcome is. Or they simply don't understand anything about how housing finance works.

Fannie and Freddie help the economy with their guarantees, Simon reasoned but exposed taxpayers to their risks by having their own investment portfolios.

As of now, all profits from both companies go to the Treasury Department, per changes made last year to the terms of the conservatorship. In the original terms, Treasury received a 10 percent dividend from Fannie and Freddie. But Fannie and Freddie are now required to fork over all of their earnings forever to Treasury, a windfall that suddenly reduced the budget deficit.

A group of investors led by the hedge fund Perry Capital challenged this arrangement in a U.S. District Court lawsuit filed last month, claiming that they deserve a share of the proceeds after taxpayers have been repaid.

Because Fannie and Freddie are now generating cash, it would in theory be possible for the government to use these profits to create a capital cushion that prevents the need for a future taxpayer bailout.

By keeping the two companies under government control, taxpayers would benefit from the sale of about $200 billion worth of equity, investors in Fannie, Freddie, and other real estate assets explained in the background. The profits would be enough to create a capital cushion to insulate against a future downturn, without having to seek capital in the private market that could push mortgage interest rates higher.

But this requires Obama and GOP lawmakers to save Fannie and Freddie, precisely what they have vowed not to do. Obama wants a government insurance fund to replace them, while Republican congressmen favor an end to any Washington involvement with guarantees.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) would eliminate almost all federal involvement in the mortgage market. His policy assumes that the rusty tin standard of 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages would soon fade away, as more homebuyers would settle for variable-rate mortgages. Interest rates on a 30-year, fixed mortgage currently average 4.4 percent, a figure that could instead swing violently over time depending on inflation and the Federal Reserve. When the Fed attempted to tamp down inflation between 1980 and 1982, rates soared above 16 percent with the government backstop in place.

Obama would like to preserve the 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage. He has endorsed adopting a more limited government backstop as outlined in a bipartisan Senate bill co-sponsored by Tennessee Republican Bob Corker and Virginia Democrat Mark Warner.

The Corker-Warner bill would also unwind Fannie and Freddie, bringing their dominance to an end. In their place would be private financial institutions that would pay into a government insurance fund. Mark Zandi, the chief economist for Moody's Analytics, estimated that the plan would cause mortgage rates to increase by as much as 1.25 percent in the near-term. This estimate assumes a 20 percent down payment and a credit score of 750, slightly above the current U.S. average.

But of course, lawmakers have not discussed the potential tradeoffs in the early stages of mortgage reform. Unless voters have a clearer picture of the consequences, some say it could produce the same kind of boondoggle caused by Obamacare in 2010.

I don't think there has been much of a sales job to the public on what a new mortgage finance system looks like, said Brian Gardner, senior vice president of Washington research at the investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. I don't think you shove this down the throat of the electorate, as we saw with the health care overhaul.

apricotgiraffe451

Economics 1021A/B Study Guide - Quiz Guide: Redistribution Of Income And Wealth

ECON 1021A/B Full Course Notes

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

Economics 1021A/B Study Guide - Quiz Guide: Economic System, Advantageous, Interpersonal Relationship

Economics 1021A/B Study Guide - Midterm Guide: Externality

Economics 1021A/B Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Marginal Cost, Marginal Utility, Big Questions

Related Questions